Renewable Energy Technologies and Health, University of Waterloo
1.1 Wind Turbine Health Studies: Epidemiological study and GIS analysis
As previously reported, the RETH survey was sent to 5000 homes across eight Ontario communities with wind generation facilities (the counties of Bruce, Dufferin, Elgin, Essex, Frontenac, Huron, Norfolk, and Chatham-Kent) in January, 2013. Homes within 5km of the selected wind farms received a survey and, later, an invitation to participate in the same survey online if they had yet to participate. The survey included sections focussing on health, sleep, environmental stressors, housing and community, and perceptions of wind. Analysis and publication of survey data is still ongoing. Results from the sleep and health sections are now available and are being prepared for submission to peer-reviewed journals. Results from other sections of the survey (perceptions, environmental stressors, health) have beenpresented at conferences and preliminary results are discussed here.
Sleep and Health
Results from the survey could suggest that there is a possible association between various health outcomes and how far someone lives from an industrial wind turbine. A cross-sectional study involving eight Ontario communities that contain greater than ten industrial wind turbines were selected for study. The ‘Quality of Life and Renewable Energy Technologies Study’ survey was sent to 4,876 residences near industrial wind turbines in these eight communities. Descriptive analyses were performed and multiple regression models were run to investigate the effect of the main independent variable of interest (distance to nearest industrial wind turbine) on the various outcome variables. Descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations were performed on a number of dependent and independent variables including age, sex, time in home, number of industrial wind turbines within 2,000 meters and sleep and health outcomes.Read article
Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post The wind industry is dangerous to human health, posing risks to everything from dizziness and nausea to chronic stress and heart conditions
A Canadian court will soon decide if wind turbines violate Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms by posing a risk to human health. Charter case decisions can be convoluted but the fundamental question of health at issue here is straightforward. Wind turbines, from all that is today known and by any rational measure, represent a risk to those living in their vicinity.
Although the wind industry and its government backers tend to dismiss concerns, the evidence of harm in communities that host wind turbines is overwhelming. Literally thousands of people around the world report similar adverse health effects, some so serious that owners abandon their homes. Studies of noise from turbines — though few in number, short in duration, tentative in their findings and conducted by interested parties — point to dangers. As if these weren’t enough, basic science sounds the alarm on wind turbines. Read article
CMAJ Blogs Carmen Krogh, BScPharm (retired), is a peer reviewed IWT health researcher and former Director of Publications and Editor-in-Chief of the CPS. R Y McMurtry is Professor Emeritus (Surgery) of Western University (formerly University of Western Ontario). Dr. McMurtry was also an ADM at Health Canada 2000-02
Industrial wind turbines (IWTs) are being erected at rapid pace around the world. Coinciding with the introduction of IWTs, some individuals living in proximity to IWTs report adverse health effects including annoyance, sleep disturbance, stress-related health impacts and reduced quality of life. [i],[ii],[iii],[iv],[v],[vi],[vii],[viii],[ix],[x],[xi],[xii] In some cases Canadian families reporting adverse health effects have abandoned their homes, been billeted away from their homes or hired legal counsel to successfully reach a financial agreement with the wind energy developer.[xiii]
Here we briefly comment on the HC Study results and provide some historical context.
Acknowledgement of IWT adverse health effects is not new. The term “annoyance” frequently appears when discussing IWT health effects. In a 2009 letter the Honourable Rona Ambrose, disclosed:
“Health Canada provides advice on the health effect of noise and low-frequency electric and magnetic fields from proposed wind turbine projects…To date, their examination of the scientific literature on wind turbine noise is that the only health effect conclusively demonstrated from exposure to wind turbine noise is an increase of self-reported general annoyance and complaints (i.e., headaches, nausea, tinnitus, vertigo).” [xiv]Read article
As noted in the second installment of this series, Dr. Geoff Leventhall, a co-author of the 2009 AWEA/CanWEA report, attributes the health complaints of people who live near industrial wind turbines (IWTs) to psychological stress, but does not acknowledge that IWTs can be detrimental to health because infrasound and low-frequency noise (ILFN) emitted by wind turbines are largely inaudible to humans. He stands on the argument, therefore, that what we can’t hear can’t hurt us.
We know that things we cannot see, touch, taste, or smell can hurt us, so why is it unreasonable also to believe that what we can’t hear might also hurt us?
Dr. Nina Pierpont, in describing Wind Turbine Syndrome (WTS), has expressed her belief that many of the symptoms comprising WTS are mediated by overstimulation of the vestibular system of the inner ear by ILFN. Recent evidence supports the general view that the functioning of both the vestibular and cochlear components of the inner ear, and their interconnections with the brain, mediate the type of symptoms that Pierpont and others have described.
Infrasound: More of a Problem Than We Thought? Industrial-scale wind turbines generate peak sound pressure levels at infrasonic frequencies, especially between 0.25 and 3 Hz, as the blades pass in front of the tower. Most of us do not experience the energy in this lowest of low-frequency regions as sound; instead, we perceive a variety of other sensations. When present, infrasound can be more of a problem than audible sound. Read full article
by Keith Stelling, Owen Sound Sun Times
Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise “Statistics” Avoid Real Health Problems
Tim Matheson (Nov. 11, 2014) tells us he has had enough of wind turbine health effects. I am sure that the many people living near Ontario’s wind turbines who are still suffering from pounding in the chest and head, dizziness, headaches, ringing in the ears and sleep deprivation have had enough too. However, the serious inaccuracies in Mr. Matheson’s letter must not go without comment. It is entirely untrue, as he claims, that “every peer-reviewed study world-wide has consistently shown the same” as the Health Canada key findings.
Our Grey-Bruce Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Hazel Lynn found 18 peer-reviewed studies that “provide reasonable evidence . . . that an association exists between wind turbines and distress in humans”. Instead of disparaging Dr. Lynn we should admire and respect her for taking the trouble to listen to her constituents and speaking the truth. The Brown County (Wisconsin) Board of Health has taken the growing peer-reviewed evidence seriously enough to declare its industrial wind turbines a “public health nuisance” and a “human health hazard for all people (residents, workers, visitors, and sensitive passers-by) who are exposed to Infrasound/Low Frequency Noise and other emissions potentially harmful to human health”. Continue reading →
Colin Perkel, Globe and Mail
Families opposed to the erection of large-scale wind farms near their homes failed to prove the projects would cause any serious harm to their health, an Ontario government lawyer said Tuesday. In his opening comments, Matthew Horner told a Divisional Court panel that a review tribunal was correct to reject objections to the turbines based on health concerns.
“There’s no indication that the tribunal made a palpable and overriding error,” Horner said late on Day 2 of the hearing. He also said the tribunal was right to reject the residents’ “novel argument” that the approvals process violates the constitution.
Four families are asking the appellate court to throw out decisions by the Environment Review Tribunal that upheld approvals of three large-scale wind-energy projects. They also want the approvals process declared unconstitutional on the grounds that the law precludes them from arguing turbines might cause them harm. Read article
By Kate Dubinski, The London Free Press
Lawyers representing four families battling wind turbine projects in Southwestern Ontario continued their legal arguments Tuesday in a London courtroom, arguing that the government is asking rural residents to bear the psychological and physical brunt of green energy projects.
“The legislative scheme is so skewed to fast-track green energy projects that it gives no meaningful way to appeal the projects,” said laywer Asha James, who represents the four families at the divisional court hearing. “(We) submit that given the state of current scientific knowledge, if an appellant is able to prove that there’s a reasonable expectation of harm, that is enough to stop a project.” The lawyers are asking the three Superior Court trial judges hearing an appeal of a decision of the Environmental Review Tribunal to rewrite the law because it’s unfair.
Tuesday was the second day of what was supposed to be a three-day hearing, but the lawyers for the defendants — starting with lawyers for the government — didn’t start their arguments until late in the day, so the hearing will likely go into Thursday. The government lawyers, who will be followed by lawyers representing three wind turbine projects, will argue that the original tribunal found that there wasn’t any serious harm to people living near wind turbines and that the Renewable Energy Act doesn’t deprive anyone of their fundamental rights, said Matthew Horner, one of the government lawyers. Read article
London Free Press, John Miner
The legal battle to halt wind farms won’t be abandoned because of a Health Canada study released last week, opponents of the turbines say. The Health Canada study dismissed claims wind farms cause medical problems for people living nearby.
“It makes no difference at all,” said Anita Frayne of Safe Wind Energy for All Residents, a Huron County group backing a lawsuit that claims the Ontario government didn’t exercise due diligence when crafting the Green Energy and Economy Act. Frayne said the widely publicized Health Canada study was only a preliminary analysis of the data and it hasn’t been peer reviewed. “It doesn’t provide any definitive answers on its own. I think the real question is, why did they even decide to release this at this point?” she said.
In publishing the study on its website, Health Canada said it was trying to be more open and transparent. Despite the study’s findings, Frayne said, opposition to the wind farms continues to gain momentum. Read article
Elliot Ferguson, Kingston Whig-Standard
KINGSTON, Ont. – One of the key experts backing opposition to a wind energy development on Amherst Island said a recent Health Canada study is more politics than science. John Harrison, a Queen’s University professor emeritus in physics and a member of the Association to Protect Amherst Island, located near Kingston, Ont., said the report contradicts itself and was not peer reviewed.
In a report released last week, Health Canada said there is no link between noise from wind turbines and adverse health effects. Health Canada scientists looked at communities that host wind farms. Two dozen government, academic and industry experts contributed to the study. Researchers examined 1,200 participants living within 2 km of wind turbines in Ontario and P.E.I.
Scientists found that while some residents living near wind turbines noted some indicators of stress — sleep disruption, headaches — there was nothing to indicate those stressors were the result of the wind turbines. Harrison pointed out that the report later states that annoyance caused by the noise from wind turbines is linked to sleep problems, illness, stress and quality of life. Read article
Rob Gowan, Kincardine News
Dr. Hazel Lynn says an important segment of the population has been left out of a Health Canada study into the impact of industrial wind turbines on peoples’ health.
The Health Canada study, released Thursday, found no link between wind turbine noise and negative health effects in people. But Lynn, the medical officer of health for Grey-Bruce who has done a review of such studies, said some of the best survey findings are from the people who have moved away because they simply couldn’t live near turbines.
“These folks are still living there so obviously they are not in that 10% of people who actually abandoned their homes,” Lynn said of those who participated in the study.
“Although the wind folks would pooh-pooh those people (who have moved away) as being especially difficult, I think they are especially sensitive and if you are living in a place where you are afraid to go to sleep at night then you are going to move. Obviously this study didn’t pick up any of those folks.” Read article
The Medical Officer of Health for Grey Bruce is disappointed with a Health Canada report on wind turbines. Doctor Hazel Lynn says the study leaves a lot of questions unanswered, including how the study was conducted.
Health Canada says it found no evidence linking exposure to wind turbine noise and health effects reported by people living near the towering structures. However, the study did find a relationship between increasing levels of wind turbine noise and residents’ annoyance related to noise, vibration and shadow flicker from the structures.
The year-long study included a detailed questionnaire to adults in more than 1,200 households in southwestern Ontario and P.E.I. living at various distances from almost 400 wind turbines. Read article
Stop These Things
At the recent 168th Meeting of the Acoustical Society of America, a session was dedicated to research papers related to wind turbine noise and noise standards. Here are the slides and notes from one of these presentations – made by William Palmer, a Professional Engineer based in Canada who listened to what people were saying and used their abandoned homes to better understand the annoyance from wind turbines.
Wind Turbine Annoyance – a clue from acoustic room modes
Acoustical Society of America
29 October 2014
Abstract When one admits that they do not know all the answers and sets out to listen to the stories of people annoyed by wind turbines, the clues can seem confusing. Why would some people report that they could get a better night’s sleep in an outdoor tent, rather than their bedroom?
Others reported that they could sleep better in the basement recreation room of their home, than in bedrooms. That made little sense either.
A third mysterious clue came from acoustic measurements at homes nearby wind turbines. Analysis of the sound signature revealed low-frequency spikes, but at amplitudes well below those expected to cause annoyance.
The clues merged while studying the acoustic room modes in a home, to reveal a remarkable hypothesis as to the cause of annoyance from wind turbines. In rooms where annoyance was felt, the frequencies flagged by room mode calculations and the low-frequency spikes observed from wind turbine measurements coincided.
This paper will discuss the research and the results, which revealed a finding that provides a clue to the annoyance, and potentially even a manner of providing relief. Read article
I’m sure everyone reading this has had the experience of phoning some corporate entity (Hydro, Bell, Visa, etc.) and heard the pre-recorded message, “This call is being recorded for quality assurances purposes…”. Yeah right. Well, a similar act is played out in the ERT hearings. Often the wind company will engage a court reporter to provide a transcript of the testimony. Other parties will be offered copies IF they pony up a portion of the costs. Often the MOE will do so. They will use this record further down the line when final submissions are made. What they likely will not do is get the transcript certified. Why, you ask? Because certified transcripts must be submitted to the ERT and then it becomes a public document that anyone can a have access to.
There’s lots of stuff that happens in an ERT that a wind company and their helpers (MOE) wouldn’t want the public to hear. I wish we could have afforded the cost of a court reporter for Nextera’s Adelaide ERT appeal. That’s the way the game is played.
So when an actual certified transcript becomes available, it’s a rare thing indeed. Such is the case with the St.Columban and K-2 appeals and excerpts appeared in the factum submitted for the court case in London in mid-November. Of particular note is the testimony of the post-turbine witnesses for those appeals. The first installment is Barb Ashbee’s testimony for both appeals.
Evidence of post-turbine witnesses heard on all three appeals
The Dixon-Ryan Appellants called the evidence of two post-turbine witnesses, Barb Ashbee and Sandy MacLeod, both of whom were forced to leave their home because of the effects that the wind turbines were having on their health. Their evidence was subsequently entered before the Tribunal by way of transcript on the Drennan and Kroeplin appeals. Continue reading →
The Brown County Board of Health voted tonight to declare the Shirley Wind Turbine Development a Human Health Hazard. The decision was based on a report of a year-long study conducted by the Enz family with assistance from Mr Rick James to document acoustic emissions from the wind turbines including infrasound and low frequency noise, inside homes within a radius of 6 miles of the Shirley Wind turbines.
The wording of the motion was as follows:
“To declare the Industrial Wind Turbines in the Town of Glenmore, Brown County. WI. a Human Health Hazard for all people (residents, workers, visitors, and sensitive passersby) who are exposed to Infrasound/Low Frequency Noise and other emissions potentially harmful to human health.”
The context is in reference to Brown County Code 38.01 in the Brown County Ordinances, in Chapter 38, relating to Public Health Nuisance (section (b) Human Health Hazard). “Human Health Hazard” means a substance, activity or condition that is known to have the potential to cause acute or chronic illness or death if exposure to the substance, activity or condition is not abated.
The vote to declare it a Human Health Hazard now puts Duke Energy’s Shirley Wind Development on the defensive to prove to the Board they are not the cause of the health complaints documented in the study, and could result in a shut down order.
The last couple of days have been very windy in Chatham-Kent. Here is a sample of what people are reporting from four different wind projects in Chatham-Kent:
Havent slept for three nights….people are telling me “you look exhausted”
Wind is bad today ! Been sick all night and today.Vertigo is hovering over my body with vibrations…It totally sucks !
I have been suffering from Tinnitus since our turbines were activated in January. I saw a specialist this week who found that I also had ocular flutter. She then had me do some balance test that I failed miserably and I was quite embarrassed.
very windy from the South southeast for a couple of days/nights now. My dog has been agitated. I have had a sharp pain in my right ear. Had to close all the windows to try to shut out the “pulsing jet engine” turbine roar. Called the MOE last night (for the 206th time).
Sadly, this is just the beginning of the fall/winter turbine hell!
Living close to wind farms may lead to severe hearing damage or even deafness, according to new research which warns of the possible danger posed by low frequency noise. The physical composition of inner ear was “drastically” altered following exposure to low frequency noise, like that emitted by wind turbines, a study has found. The research will delight critics of wind farms, who have long complained of their detrimental effects on the health of those who live nearby.
Published today by the Royal Society in their new journal Open Science, the research was carried out by a team of scientists from the University of Munich. It relies on a study of 21 healthy men and women aged between 18 and 28 years. After being exposed to low frequency sound, scientists detected changes in the type of sound being emitted from the inner ear of 17 out of the 21 participants. The changes were detected in a part of the ear called the cochlear, a spiral shaped cavity which essential for hearing and balance.
“We explored a very curious phenomenon of the human ear: the faint sounds which a healthy human ear constantly emits,” said Dr Marcus Drexl, one of the authors of the report. “These are like a very faint constant whistling that comes out of your ear as a by-product of the hearing process. We used these as an indication of how processes in the inner ear change.” Dr Drexl and his team measured these naturally emitted sounds before and after exposure to 90 seconds of low frequency sound.
“Usually the sound emitted from the ear stays at the same frequency,” he said. “But the interesting thing was that after exposure, these sounds changed very drastically. “They started to oscillate slowly over a couple of minutes. This can be interpreted as a change of the mechanisms in the inner ear, produced by the low frequency sounds. “This could be a first indication that damage might be done to the inner ear.
“We don’t know what happens if you are exposed for longer periods of time, [for example] if you live next to a wind turbine and listen to these sounds for months of years.”Read article
Wind energy is fairly new and controversial in this province with some saying it’s a much needed clean source of energy, while others — many of them in communities around Lake Ontario and Lake Erie — are saying ‘not in my backyard’. Considerations with wind turbines include the environmental mark they make and the environmental benefits they offer, as well as the financial implications.
There are five wind turbines in West Lincoln now but there will be many, many more as soon as they pass environmental approvals. Ontario Power Authority says wind is an important part of its energy portfolio — it’s expanding infrastructure for all the power Ontario produces and the province wants a mix of sources so they balance each other out — especially now that they’ve phased out coal. But in West Lincoln, people say their rural way of life is being destroyed, and there’s nothing they can do to stop it. Read article
September 24th, 2014
Last week Dr. Eric Hoskins, provincial Minister of Health for Ontario left the plowing match in Ivy where he and Wynne and other cabinet ministers were heckled about wind turbines, and travelled to Markdale to announce that funding would be provided for a new hospital in Markdale.
I’m very glad to tell you that he had to drive past the nice, big, clear WIND TURBINES-WE ALL LOSE billboard to get to Markdale. We have received donations for about 4 months more time to keep it up on display. Thank you to all who have contributed because the sign is most certainly seen by many who live well beyond the Markdale area. Any more contributions will be gratefully accepted so we can keep it up for another YEAR!
After Dr. Hoskins made his speech and before the photo op under the sign for a new hospital, Ginny Stewart gave him a package of information and asked for his help. Ginny is one of a number of Grey Highlands residents who have suffered health issues since the start up of industrial wind turbines in our municipality. At least one of our residents has simply walked away from a home that became unfit to live in after turbine start-up. One of the documents hand-delivered to Hoskins is attached along with a photo of Ginny and Dr. Hoskins. Continue reading →
Kristy Hansen, Branko Zajamsek and Colin Hansen, School of Mechanical Engineering
University of Adelaide May 26, 2014 Waubra Foundation
This report by the above authors describes the results of their concurrent full spectrum acoustic monitoring conducted at a number of homes located between 2 km out to nearly 10km from the Waterloo Wind Development. This monitoring was independent of the South Australian Environment Protection Authority (SA EPA) and was requested by Mrs Mary Morris and other concerned residents in the Waterloo district. The monitoring occurred during the period of the South Australian EPA Acoustic Survey, conducted in mid 2013.
The results in this independent survey as well as the conclusions are in marked contrast to the results and conclusions of the SA EPA Acoustic Survey report, and reinforce the Waubra Foundation’s opinion expressed at the time the initial SA EPA report was released that there were serious problems with the methodology used by the SA EPA in its acoustic survey at Waterloo. This report provides further evidence that the current SA EPA Wind Farm Noise Guidelines do not protect the health and sleep of the neighbours to these wind developments, out to nearly 10km from the closest wind turbine, because they do not regulate the acoustic emissions to protect health, and most importantly, the sleep of the neighbours.
Emeritus Professor Colin Hansen has advised that he sent the report to the EPA, requesting their comment. To date, three months later (19th August, 2014) no comment or feedback has been received by the Adelaide University researchers from the SA EPA responsible public officials.
Extract from the Conclusions:
“Therefore, the results show that there is a low frequency noise problem associated with the Waterloo wind farm. Therefore, it is extremely important that further investigation is carried out at this wind farm in order to determine the source of the low frequency noise and to develop mitigation technologies. In addition, further research is necessary to establish the long‐term effects of low frequency noise and infrasound on the residents at Waterloo. This research should include health monitoring and sleep studies with simultaneous noise and vibration measurements.” Read article
By Steffanie Petroni, Northern Hoot
During the1930’s the public began expressing concerns about smoking referencing a persistent smoker’s cough or smoker’s hack. When the tobacco companies caught wind of the grumblings they concocted a pre-emptive marketing campaign. Who was more trusted than doctors on the matter of health? Tobacco companies like Lucky Strike and Camels enlisted the reassuring image of doctors, though most were actors, to endorse the ‘throat soothing’ qualities and preferred smooth taste of a particular brand.
In the 1940’s and 1950’s tobacco companies applied a different spin to their advertising. While some pitched that their cigarettes weren’t harmful, other brands claimed to be less harmful. Around this time physicians were aware of the addictive quality of cigarettes but weren’t convinced that there was a direct causal factor between smoking and disease.
It was in 1964 when the United States Surgeon General issued the first report of the Surgeon General’s Advisory Committee on Smoking and Health. Their findings concluded- over thirty years after the public first began ringing alarm bells, that there was certainly a direct link between smoking and lung cancer and bronchitis. Read article
By Megan Stacey, The London Free Press
Emotions are running high at the opening day of an Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal hearing to determine the fate of a wind turbine project by NextEra Energy in Lambton and Middlesex Counties. Community members and the County of Lambton are facing off against the Ontario Environment Ministry and NextEra Energy over the Jericho Wind Energy Project, which would bring 92 turbines to the region.
An opening statement by resident Muriel Allingham, who is appealing the provincial ministry’s approval of the Jericho project alongside several other community members, attacked NextEra as greedy. In order to overturn the province’s approval of the Jericho Wind Project, Allingham and the County of Lambton must prove it will cause severe harm to humans or the environment.
The first presenter of the day, Elizabeth Bellavance, a local community and social justice advocate, urged the tribunal to consider the injustice of the requirement. In any project other than renewable energy where products like wind and vibration are released into the environment, showing “adverse effects” is enough to halt their use.
The community’s case against NextEra is virtually non-existent without the testimony of Sarah Hornblower, a local woman and mother who would have been a key witness in the hearing. The tribunal denied a summons for Hornblower late Wednesday afternoon. read article
Incase you want to hear what Sarah Hornblower said last year before she signed her gag agreement, see the video below. (Now why wouldn’t the ERT want to hear about this? And why would both NextEra and Suncor fight so hard to have her silenced too?)
Paul Morden, Sarnia Observer
The question of whether or not a mother of three autistic children will be called to testify at an appeal of Ontario’s environmental approval of a 92-turbine wind farm in Lambton County is set to be argued Tuesday in Parkhill. A summons for Sarah Hornblower to testify at Ontario Environmental Review Tribunal hearings into an appeal of the Environment Ministry’s renewable energy approval for NextEra Energy’s Jericho Wind Energy project is the subject of a preliminary hearing Tuesday, 11 a.m., at the North Middlesex Community Centre.
The summons was issued by Sylvan resident Bob Lewis, who is appealing the ministry’s approval for the wind project. Lewis is being assisted by Lambton Shores resident Marcelle Brooks who declined Monday to comment on details of the summons, but said, “The hearing tomorrow is going to be quite unique, because I don’t believe anyone has ever summoned a witness who has been gagged.”
Last week, Brooks said they had summoned a witness who had agreements with wind companies. Hornblower, who lives with her family on Ridge Road in Lambton Shores, spoke in public in the past about her concerns that wind turbines planned for the community could impact three of her children who have been diagnosed with autism. Read article
Sun News, Jerry Agar
It is heart wrenching to see and feel the pain of fellow Ontarians breaking down in tears as they explain how the Liberal government drove them from their homes. But to understand how cold and callous our current political leadership is in this province, you need to experience it.
Rebecca Thompson’s documentary, Down Wind: How Ontario’s Green Dream Turned into a Nightmare (Surge Media Productions), airs on Sun News Wednesday at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. It is a story of reckless, agenda-driven politics resulting in shattered lives. The Ontario Liberal government’s Green Energy Act isn’t just an economic failure; it is an act of brutal indifference to the human cost of politics.
A cost ignored by people living far from the thump of the giant wind turbines, secure in their downtown Toronto homes and politically correct theories; a safe distance from places like Ripley, Clear Creek and Lucknow, Ontario. Many may not care – worshiping as they do at the altar of so-called green energy – that the jobs promised by the Liberals through their Green Energy Act were never delivered, while the cost of hydro skyrocketed. But the human cost should matter to us all. Read article
Bayshore Broadcasting, by Matt Villeneuve
(Grey Bruce)- The Wind Turbine Study completed by the Grey-Bruce Medical Officer of Health and Sudbury based researcher Doctor Ian Arra has been accepted for publication in an academic journal. Cuerus — a peer-reviewed journal managed by academics from Stanford University, the University of Chicago, John Hopkins, the American Medical Association — has accepted the document following an external review.
In an email, Doctor Arra says only minor adjustments will be made to the paper. MOH Doctor Hazel Lynn tells Bayshore Broadcasting News the study was fairly comprehensive, prompting its submission for the peer-review process. Read article
Executive Summary Dr. Michaud is a researcher with Health Canada. He is the principal investigator for a Health Canada study into the effects of noise generated by wind turbines on human beings.
Dr. Michaud was called as a witness before the Environmental Review Tribunal by counsel for communities and individuals affected by wind farm development in rural areas of Ontario. The primary finding elicited from Dr. Michaud’s testimony is that no studies have been completed in Canada on the dose-response relationship between noise generated by wind turbines and certain health effects. In particular, Dr. Michaud referred to a “knowledge gap” in respect of low frequency noise and infrasound generated by wind turbines. Dr. Michaud cited studies in other jurisdictions which lead him to conclude that there is credible scientific support for an association between noise generated by wind turbines and certain negative health effects.